From: Filipe Manana <[email protected]> The comment for can_nocow_extent() says that the function will flush ordered extents, however that never happens and was never true before the comment was added in commit e4ecaf90bc13 ("btrfs: add comments for btrfs_check_can_nocow() and can_nocow_extent()"). This is true only for the function btrfs_check_can_nocow(), which after that commit was renamed to check_can_nocow(). So just remove that part of the comment.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]> --- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index 0dbe1aaa0b71..589030cefd90 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c @@ -7105,9 +7105,6 @@ static struct extent_map *btrfs_new_extent_direct(struct btrfs_inode *inode, * @strict: if true, omit optimizations that might force us into unnecessary * cow. e.g., don't trust generation number. * - * This function will flush ordered extents in the range to ensure proper - * nocow checks for (nowait == false) case. - * * Return: * >0 and update @len if we can do nocow write * 0 if we can't do nocow write -- 2.28.0